The Senate’s nuclear-option armistice is close to collapsing — but not quite yet.
Senate Democrats bristled at how Republicans blocked confirmation votes last week on two of President Obama’s nominees: Rep. Melvin Watt, D-N.C., to head the agency overseeing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and Patricia Millett to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Majority Leader Harry Reid hasn’t ruled out the option of trying to change the Senate’s rules to ban filibusters against nominations and allow for confirmations on a simple-majority vote (the so-called nuclear option), leadership aides say. Even President Pro Tempore Patrick Leahy of Vermont took to the floor recently to say that if Republicans do not reverse themselves, “drastic” measures should be taken.
It is in this environment that the highest-profile nomination of the fall approaches. Janet Yellen, Obama’s pick to succeed Ben Bernanke as the head of the Federal Reserve Board, will face a Senate Banking Committee hearing on Nov. 14. Yellen, nominated in October after a liberal revolt against Obama’s presumptive choice of Lawrence Summers, has been spending time on Capitol Hill, meeting privately with senators ahead of her hearing.
But Yellen’s nomination is not likely to be the Enola Gay in the nuclear-option battle. “I don’t think this is the right line to draw in terms of making a political statement,” said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I. Added Dwight Fettig, former staff director to Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson, D-S.D.: “Given the importance of the Fed chairmanship, expected broad support for Yellen, and desire of both parties to avoid further market uncertainty following the shutdown and debt-limit brinkmanship, I don’t believe either side will want to use this nomination to wage a political fight.”
Republicans have plenty of pointed questions for Yellen on monetary policy, but they’re still predicting that she will get the 60 votes she’ll need to overcome the holds against her, including one from Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who wants to see an audit of the Fed. Banking Committee member Bob Corker of Tennessee senses there’s no appetite among fellow Republicans to block her. “I shouldn’t say things like this,” he said. “But, yeah, [she will get 60 votes.]”
Sen. Richard Shelby, the former top Republican on the Banking Committee and a current panel member, voted against Yellen as vice chairwoman. Even after a “courteous” meeting with her, Shelby said he has some problems with her nomination. But will that be enough to vote against cloture and maybe ignite the nuclear spark? “I believe, at the end of the day, the Federal Reserve nominee — unless barring something awful happening — should have probably an up-or-down vote,” Shelby said.
Yellen can expect to face questions about her time as head of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, whether her views are too Keynesian, and whether she favors the Fed’s unemployment mandate over its inflation mandate. Senate Republicans cite inflation and quantitative easing as top worries. “There is concern at this point about the monetary easing the Fed’s going through and whether she’s going to be careful so that we don’t get into an inflationary problem down the road,” said Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D.
Democrats are broadly supportive of Yellen. Some, especially Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, will want to hear Yellen’s views on the Fed’s regulatory role, but given recent Democratic discipline it would be surprising to see defections. So, if Yellen has the votes to overcome Republican holds, what sense does it make to flip the nuclear switch over her nomination? aides ask. “We’re not going to preemptively go nuclear,” a Senate Democratic leadership aide said.
But that doesn’t mean the debate over Senate rules has been put on hold. “I think Mel Watt’s nomination has already reopened that, and [weighing the nuclear option] is already well underway,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., a Banking Committee member who supports Yellen and is one of the Senate’s leading proponents of going nuclear.
Indeed, Watt and Millett could soon have company as nominees unable to win 60 votes to overcome filibusters. Arguing that the D.C. Circuit has too light a workload and that judges appointed by a Democratic president would adopt a liberal view on the bench, Republicans have signaled they will block Obama nominees Cornelia T.L. Pillard and Robert L. Wilkins as well. Reid’s office said a cloture vote on their nominations could come as soon as Monday, but Republicans are skeptical of the nuclear saber-rattling, reasoning that the Democrats know they could lose their majority some day.
“You can only run that drill so many times,” Corker said. “I’m sorry. I can’t take it seriously.”
If Reid follows through with another showdown over nominations, it would be the first time since a July truce, brokered in part by Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and John McCain, R-Ariz., after a rare, all-senator meeting in the Old Senate Chamber. The way Democrats see it, qualified nominees are entitled to a simple-majority vote, and Republicans are picking on nominees whose agencies or positions they fundamentally disagree with.
Republicans sound weary of the fight and are ready to find out whether Democrats are bluffing. “It’d be really bad form,” Corker said. “After all that occurred this summer, to then come out and say — you might as well, if every time someone has concerns about nominees the nuclear option comes up, you might as well be at a 51-vote threshold. If they do it, they do it.”
What We're Following See More »
“A bill headed for President Barack Obama this week includes a provision that would ban U.S. imports of fish caught by slaves in Southeast Asia, gold mined by children in Africa and garments sewn by abused women in Bangladesh, closing a loophole in an 85-year-old tariff law.” The Senate approved the bill, which would also ban Internet taxes and overhaul trade laws, by a vote of 75-20. It now goes to President Obama.
Bernie Sanders has closed to within seven points of Hillary Clinton in a new Morning Consult survey. Clinton leads 46%-39%. Consistent with the New Hampshire voting results, Clinton does best with retirees, while Sanders leads by 20 percentage points among those under 30. On the Republican side, Donald Trump is far ahead with 44% support. Trailing by a huge margin are Ted Cruz (17%), Ben Carson (10%) and Marco Rubio (10%).
President Obama became a surprise topic of contention toward the end of the Democratic debate, as Hillary Clinton reminded viewers that Sanders had challenged the progressive bona fides of President Obama in 2011 and suggested that someone might challenge him from the left. “The kind of criticism that we’ve heard from Senator Sanders about our president I expect from Republicans, I do not expect from someone running for the Democratic nomination to succeed President Obama,” she said. “Madame Secretary, that is a low blow,” replied Sanders, before getting in another dig during his closing statement: “One of us ran against Barack Obama. I was not that candidate.”
It’s all about the 1% and Wall Street versus everyone else for Bernie Sanders—even when he’s talking about race relations. Like Hillary Clinton, he needs to appeal to African-American and Hispanic voters in coming states, but he insists on doing so through his lens of class warfare. When he got a question from the moderators about the plight of black America, he noted that during the great recession, African Americans “lost half their wealth,” and “instead of tax breaks for billionaires,” a Sanders presidency would deliver jobs for kids. On the very next question, he downplayed the role of race in inequality, saying, “It’s a racial issue, but it’s also a general economic issue.”
It’s been said in just about every news story since New Hampshire: the primaries are headed to states where Hillary Clinton will do well among minority voters. Leaving nothing to chance, she underscored that point in her opening statement in the Milwaukee debate tonight, saying more needs to be done to help “African Americans who face discrimination in the job market” and immigrant families. She also made an explicit reference to “equal pay for women’s work.” Those boxes she’s checking are no coincidence: if she wins women, blacks and Hispanics, she wins the nomination.